Previous papers have examined the physical differences between natural and artificial gravity, through mathematical derivation and computer simulation. Taking those differences as given, this paper examines: the role of gravity in architectural design; the extensions of architectural theory necessary to accommodate the peculiarities of artificial gravity; and the appropriateness of space colony architecture as illustrated in the "Stanford Torus", "Bernal Sphere", and similar proposals. In terrestrial gravity, there are three principal directions - up, down, and horizontal - and three basic architectural elements - ceiling, floor, and wall. In artificial gravity, due to inertial effects of relative motion in a rotating environment, east and west (prograde and retrograde) emerge as gravitationally distinct. Thus, there are not only three, but at least five principal directions: up, down, east, west, and axial. The grammar of architecture for artificial gravity should accommodate this fact. To be meaningful, architecture should have formal properties that are similar to other aspects of the environment. The goal is not to fool people into thinking they're still on Earth, but rather, to help them orient themselves to the realities of their rotating environment.

References:

The Architecture of Artificial Gravity: Mathematical Musings on Designing for Life and Motion in a Centripetally Accelerated Environment

The Architecture of Artificial Gravity: Archetypes and Transformations of Terrestrial Design

The Architecture of Artificial-Gravity Environments for Long-Duration Space Habitation